Everyone seems to agree Claudia Rosales was competent at her job. She’d been at north shore school Turramurra High for a decade, teaching mathematics and software subjects since 2014. Students described her as a good teacher, energetic and sometimes strict. They also noticed she didn’t seem to have much of a filter.
In November last year, after an investigation into her conduct, the Department of Education terminated her.
It was perhaps unsurprising. She had given students what she termed a dressing down over late payment for an excursion. There were allegations, ultimately not upheld, she had told a year 12 girl to f— off and slapped her hand.
There were also allegations of sexualised conversations with students, and outbursts towards other staff. Parents of a year 11 student described a “15-minute yelling episode including student criticism, bullying, condescending attitude and intimidation techniques”. She referred to one boy as a coward. She’d been subject to investigations on four separate occasions.
As the termination letter on November 15 last year said: “Comments of a sexualised or belittling nature, physical contact with students, and verbal aggression are wholly inconsistent with the professional standards and ethical obligations of a teacher.”
The NSW Industrial Relations Commission sifted through various accounts of a decade of incidents, student accounts and internal investigation to find the dismissal was not unjust nor unreasonable. It was, however, harsh. It ruled on Monday that Rosales could have a job back within the NSW school system, although not at Turramurra High.
Excerpt from termination letter
“The sustained conduct is objectively serious and demonstrates a consistent and concerning pattern of inappropriate behaviour over an extended period of time.
Across multiple incidents, you engaged in unprofessional, aggressive and disrespectful communication with students, parents and colleagues. Your actions include the use of offensive language towards staff, unprofessional written correspondence with students and parents, inappropriate comments and physical interactions with students, and unprofessional behaviour in front of classes and at professional learning events. These incidents are not isolated or minor lapses in judgement; rather, they represent a repeated failure to meet fundamental standards of professional conduct expected of a teacher.
The conduct is particularly serious given its persistence over a number of years, despite repeated formal interventions and clear management directions. You have been explicitly instructed on several occasions by multiple senior officers, including principals and directors, to improve your professional behaviour and to engage respectfully with others. You have also received a formal warning regarding inappropriate comments to students. Despite these clear instructions, you continued to engage in the same type of misconduct, demonstrating an inability or unwillingness to moderate your behaviour. The repeated nature of the conduct, in defiance of lawful directions, significantly increases its gravity.
Of particular concern is that several of the sustained allegations involve inappropriate and demeaning comments and actions directed towards students – individuals for whom teachers hold a duty of care. Comments of a sexualised or belittling nature, physical contact with students, and verbal aggression are wholly inconsistent with the professional standards and ethical obligations of a teacher. Such behaviour has the potential to cause emotional harm to students, erode trust, and undermine the integrity of the teacher-student relationship.
While you have presented evidence of ongoing health issues, these do not mitigate the seriousness of the misconduct. The department has a duty to ensure that the school environment remains safe, respectful and supportive for students, parents and staff. The frequency and nature of the sustained incidents, combined with your failure to modify your behaviour after repeated management interventions, indicate that your continued employment poses an ongoing risk to the welfare of others and to the reputation of the teaching profession. Taken together, the sustained misconduct constitutes a serious and ongoing breach of professional standards and demonstrates conduct incompatible with the responsibilities of a teacher.”
The late excursion payment
In one episode in 2017, two year 11 students had failed to pay for an excursion on time. Rosales pulled the boy and girl out of class and gave them a “dressing down”. She told them they needed to be “responsible and not to expect parents to do all the work”. The girl’s parents wrote a complaint after their daughter suffered a panic attack. They alleged she had “yelled” and “screamed” at “an otherwise perfect student” during a “15-minute yelling episode including student criticism, bullying, condescending attitude and intimidation techniques”. A school counsellor who witnessed the incident described it as berating.
In another incident, a year 10 boy had failed to hand in an assignment on time and a school counsellor described Rosales screaming at him for five minutes. Rosales had said: “Do not act like a coward, you are better than that, take responsibility instead of blaming the teacher.”
The student email
In 2023, Rosales was teaching a year 9 class and there was a student who never seemed to bring a pen to class. She had supplied him with pens, but they continually went missing. So one Friday in August, she emailed his father asking him to purchase some pens.
In further correspondence, he detailed concerns around bullying and requested Rosales offer a “bi-weekly catch-up” regarding his son’s progress in the class.
“It is not feasible for me to conduct ‘bi-weekly catch-up’ as I have other responsibilities,” she said. Her response was labelled by the department as “accusatorial” and aggressive in tone – a finding that was not upheld by the commission.
The backpack incident
Another incident the following month did amount to misconduct. It related to one boy with a history of bad behaviour, including making paper planes from worksheets and using his mobile phone.
Rosales said he would come up close behind her while she was writing on the board with her back to the class, holding a pair of scissors and acting in a joking, but nonetheless threatening manner. The rule in her class was to leave bags outside. Everyone else had taken theirs outside when asked to do so. But this boy instead took the equipment out of his bag in slow motion, taking 10 to 15 minutes.
Rosales, who was “tired and busy”, took the student’s bag and threw it outside the classroom.
The slapping incident
There was also a clash in 2023 while she was distributing graduation tickets that had been arranged alphabetically. Rosales said that, when a student reached out to grab one from the pile, with the potential to mess up the order, she pushed the envelope away.
But the student described that interaction as a slap. In a subsequent investigation, the student said: she “aggressively slapped my hand and held the envelopes down and told me to ‘f— off’.” Rosales denied ever saying that, and the commissioner noted Rosales’ heavy accent might have meant “f— off” was confused with “back off”. He said it was concerning that Department of Education investigators had interviewed students but not the other teacher present. He ultimately concluded she had not sworn at the student.
Crossing professional boundaries
When Rosales first came across the student in March 2023, he was truanting and late for school. She had spoken to his father about difficult personal circumstances and said she was going to try to “connect” with him. After noting he had discussed going to the gym, Rosales asked her own son about how to engage on that subject.
She joked with him, asking “How much do you lift?” After that call with his father, the boy said she had started to “muck around” calling him “muscle man”.
One student told an internal investigation “she would brush her hands off of his bicep”. The muscle man nickname “spread like wildfire” through the school. When it came to the nickname, he didn’t find disturbing, as he said “it was a compliment”.
He noted some “inappropriate conversations” as “like a couple of short interactions”. It involved, he said, comments “like I was an attractive man or that we’ll joke around in class”.
He never complained about the behaviour. “I’d stay like after class and we’d like chat about my future and like what’s going on with my life, but she was like a mother – like, I don’t think I would’ve coped too well without her in my life.” The commissioner ultimately found it was not misconduct.
Numerous other incidents, including rebuking a girl wearing a short skirt, were not upheld as misconduct. Other incidents were labelled relatively minor breaches, including touching the stomach of a boy at the swimming carnival.
After finding the termination was harsh, the matter will be reconvened on Friday to consider whether the Department of Education has an available position for her to resume work in another school.
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
From our partners
Read the full article here
